The Vladimir Putin appreciation thread.

DetroitSpinR

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Actually its the promotion of 'non-traditional sexual relationships' and it applies to all places children might be present - IE in public. Apparently they didn't see the irony when Russian schoolkids themselves started getting prosecuted and fined under this law because, who would have thought it, young people can be gay too!

So would you classify that as an anti-gay law?

I don't know the full details but from what I've read it is legislation prohibiting the promotion of non-traditional sexual relationships where (in your words) children might be present.

That's hardly what could be called an "anti gay law", is it? In fact it certainly could apply to pretty much anything in any country.

DetroitSpinR

PopePalpatine wrote: »

And how is this "promotion" defined? It seems like saying so much as "don't hunt LGBT people" is "promotion of homosexuality" to the average Putinbot.

I don't really know PP. What's your definition of promoting something. In my experience it's a combination of someone drawing attention to something and recommending it for want of a better term I suppose.

If there is a criminalization or a restriction in Russia on promoting any kind of sexual activity to to kids then where's the issue? The same laws exist most everywhere. I don't know again what this "non-traditional" thing is all about but I still can't seem to equate shielding kids from the promotion of any kind of sexual activity as anti-gay.

Just don't get how it can be construed as an "anti-gay law".

If you have more insight I'd welcome it.

Irish Praetorian

DetroitSpinR wrote: »

So would you classify that as an anti-gay law?

I don't know the full details but from what I've read it is legislation prohibiting the promotion of non-traditional sexual relationships where (in your words) children might be present.

That's hardly what could be called an "anti gay law", is it? In fact it certainly could apply to pretty much anything in any country.

Well considering so much as carrying a Rainbow flag in public is grounds for prosecution (as well as harassment) let alone any public displays of affection or demands for better treatment, I'd put it as a pretty straightforward example of an anti-gay law and discrimination. If banning pride parades, LGBT protests, open displays of love (say kissing one's partner or holding hands, shocking that gay people might want to do what straight people do) or the mere symbols of the LGBT movement is not an anti-gay law, what do you imagine is?

SamHarris

fran17 wrote: »

You are a slippery fish aren't you,I imagine your two degrees equipped you with all the tactics you need to dodge the many questions people have asked of you in this thread.I liked the three degrees myself,I thought "When will I see you again" was a classic.
No you may not have initiated the issue regarding there funding but you continue to refuse to acknowledge the fact that they receive funding from the US government.Your argument,just like amnesty international,is flawed on the matter.
You requesting for me to "prove" that the US state department is exercising editorial control over the findings is akin to me asking you to prove they are not exercising control.Both would be,if I was to attempt it,unprovable fallacies.
I continue to believe that amnesty international must be scrutinised closely regarding matters which are of interest to the US media propaganda war that is being waged against any nation,or leader,who has the balls to stand up to uncle SamHarris.Sorry,uncle Sam.

I have no idea what you are trying to say in the first paragraph here but I will say that when someone asks me a valid question thats not ridiculous on the face of it, is not wildly off topic or are not asking a question merely to avoid answering a question I already asked then Im happy to answer.

No I explicitly said that the organization got funding from states (or is it that you want me to say *gasp* the UNITED STATES!) I just made the entirely valid point that that alone means nothing. If you have no problem with the methodology, no evidence that they fabricated anything, in fact have not even addressed anything OTHER than the funding of the organization then you simply dont have a valid argument that indicates the findings are wrong. Not even the start of one. Why are you so surprised that others do not immediately dismiss the findings of a well thought of organization baseed entirely on the fact they get funding from the US government? I'm curious, is the US government special in this? Do you believe they are the only ones that could possibly have an agenda? Please tell me your not a fan of RT...


No - you asking me to prove a negative is a logical impossibility. Me asking you to prove that it DOES have eidtorial control would be very difficult for you, unless someone else already had and you could just google for it. If no one has, and you have not then there is no evidence to hold up your claim other than, at your own admission, the fact that you would prefer if the enemies of the US were less morally reprehensible. Again, not a compelling argument to anyone other than you. I know, youve said before you dont care if anyone else is convinced by your argument but then Iwonder why bother putting the idea forward at all?

At least your honest, you choose not to believe them because its helpful to your politics if most enemies of the US do not prove themselves to be scumbags in various ways. Ok, well, that still leaves the issue of any evidence to uphold your claim. You seem to be aware of cognitive bias, do you not see that you are burning far too many calories trying to disprove something that is a pretty solid fact based, ultimately, on nothing more than your politics with regard to the US?

InTheTrees

Eugene Norman wrote: »

To steer back on topic here is a list of countries invaded by the U.S.....

Ha ha ha....

"On topic"??

Its a thread about Putin. Sam Harris was initially joking about how you Putin lovers always turn it around into Usa Bashing and look what you're doing. I guess you're not seeing the irony at all...

??

InTheTrees

DetroitSpinR wrote: »

I don't really know PP. What's your definition of promoting something. In my experience it's a combination of someone drawing attention to something and recommending it for want of a better term I suppose..

Thats a little simplistic isnt it? What about funding? Wouldn't giving money to an organisation that promtes a cause be helping to promote that cause?

Public_Enema

SamHarris wrote: »

And just for the record, no, the murder rate is three times higher in Russia than in the States. And given Russias level of development throughout much of its territory and the rampant corruption those numbers could very well be much, much higher.

Funnily enough, America has the worlds highest prisoner incarceration rate. And shockingly, 25% of the worldwide prisoner population are behind American bars. From The American Psychological Association......

While the United States has only 5 percent of the world's population, it has nearly 25 percent of its prisoners — about 2.2 million people.

While the United States has 707 incarcerated people per 100,000 citizens, for example, China has 124 to 172 per 100,000 people and Iran 284 per 100,000. North Korea is perhaps the closest, but reliable numbers are hard to find..

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2014/10/incarceration.aspx

American justice, where your bank balance determines whether you go to jail or not. Standard bearer of democracy indeed. :rolleyes:

BoJack Horseman

Public_Enema wrote: »

American justice, where your bank balance determines whether you go to jail or not. Standard bearer of democracy indeed. :rolleyes:

A lot of whataboutery in defence of the Kremlin.

Loving the passion!

BlaasForRafa

Eugene Norman wrote: »

Can you name any major invasion of the last few years that wasn't American.

Crimea.

Elmer Blooker

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Crimea.

How many innocent civilians were murdered?
Were there any war crimes committed such as leaving the civilian population without running water and sanitation which is NATO's trademark.

Irish Praetorian

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

How many innocent civilians were murdered?
Were there any war crimes committed such as leaving the civilian population without running water and sanitation which is NATO's trademark.

Several dozen in the period of and after the invasion, done by a process known as 'enforced disappearance' - goodness isn't life easy when you can do what the guys from the Sopranos do...

Oh and the shortage of running water came AFTER the annexation, who would have thought separating an agricultural region from the metropole and throwing up new borders where you like could have had that effect...

robindch

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Were there any war crimes committed such as leaving the civilian population without running water and sanitation which is NATO's trademark.

Indeed, reliable plumbing is one of the things for which Russia is known the world over - but these sneaky NATObots will attack even the most macho of bullish micropresidents!

http://sputniknews.com/russia/20131205/185284718/Putin-Complains-of-Rusty-Water-at-Home.html (*)





* link from Dmitry Kiselev's Sputnik news, to avoid accusations of using only CIA-sponsored news outlets.

robindch

Major "Блин!" from Russia where an online financial journal accidentally publishes the number of Russian soldiers killed and wounded in Ukraine. The Russian state is not only paying its soldiers to go there, but is claiming financially responsibility for the dead and wounded too, completely undermining Putin's weird claim that the thousands of Russian soldiers in Ukraine are simple "volunteers" going there for a little military action while "on holidays" - in which case, it would be happily washing its hands of the before and after-death costs:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2015/08/25/kremlin-censors-rush-to-erase-inadvertent-release-of-russian-casualties-in-east-ukraine/

The now-edited article is here and the interesting tit-bit is this paragraph where the dollar amounts have been updated to reflect the latest collapse in the rouble's exchange rate:

bs-life wrote:

Compensation of military personnel taking part in military actions in Ukraine in 2014-2015.

In addition, the Russian government, in a decision about the monetary compensation of military personnel taking part in military action in eastern Ukraine, approved compensation for families of military personnel who were killed taking part in military action in Ukraine of three million rubles (about $37,500). For those who have become invalids during military action, the compensation is one and a half million rubles (about $18,750). A payment of 1,800 rubles ($22.50) is envisioned for contract “fighters” for every day of their presence in the conflict zone. In all, as of February 1, 2015, monetary compensation had been paid to more than 2,000 families of fallen soldiers and to 3,200 military personnel suffering heavy wounds and recognized as invalids.”

Forbes wrote:

Sovietologists found many secrets of the USSR by digging into the Soviet press and technical and financial trade journals. That fallen and invalided military personnel are compensated must be reflected somewhere in budgets. As reported in Delovaya zhizn, compensation payments for those killed and invalided in Ukraine came to almost twenty million dollars, not a large share of the approximately $50 billion defense budget but large enough to appear in an appropriate budget subcategory.

Elmer Blooker

Here's an even better one from Paul Roderick Gregory.
The Times, Newsweek and Fox join forces to concoct this James Bond fantasy.

The usual T & Cs apply.

being careful to note that the Ukrainian intelligence cannot be independently verified.

http://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/paul-roderick-gregory-the-dirty-bomb-a-thwarted-putin-false-flag-operation-395598.html

Gatling

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Here's an even better one from Paul Roderick Gregory.
The Times, Newsweek and Fox join forces to concoct this James Bond fantasy.

The usual T & Cs apply.




http://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/paul-roderick-gregory-the-dirty-bomb-a-thwarted-putin-false-flag-operation-395598.html

Mean while in Russia ,
Intelligence sources claim Ukraine is building a dirty bomb all in the same article ,

It might be all a bit 007 but it could suit Russia having another Chernobyl in east Ukraine that can be an unofficial buffer zone ,

But hey anything is possible in this on going Russian saga

robindch

Oh dear, the revelations just keep on coming...

Alexander Borodai, the Russian citizen who appointed himself Prime Minister of the DNR - a part of Ukraine, let us not forget - has announced that a "Union of Donbas Volunteers" is being set up. Membership is open to any Russian citizen who "volunteered" to fight against the legitimately elected government in Kiev. Mr Borodai expects the union to have a membership of between 30,000 and 50,000 ex-volunteers.

Here's a report on the topic from the Kremlin-controlled TASS:

http://tass.ru/en/russia/816955

Tass wrote:

MOSCOW, August 27. /TASS/. A Union of Donbas Volunteers has been established in Russia, the new organization’s head and former prime minister of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic, Alexander Borodai, announced on Thursday. "The organization is undergoing registration," Borodai said. "We are planning the union’s first congress in late September." Any Russian national who took part in the Donbas events may join the union, he added.

According to Borodai, the number of Donbas volunteers varies between 30,000 and 50,000. "Russian volunteers should be socially protected and united, that is why we are establishing this organization." The Russian government has never denied presence of its nationals in Donbas stressing that these people were volunteers, not mercenaries. According to a poll conducted by the state-run Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM), most Russians (65%) approve volunteers in eastern Ukraine.

Elmer Blooker

Oh dear, the revelations just keep on coming...

What revelation?
Interesting to note that the western media (by lies, censorship etc) denies the existence of these volunteers and insists that the insurgency in eastern Ukraine is the result of "invasions" by regular Russian army troops.

Gatling

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

What revelation?
Interesting to note that the western media (by lies, censorship etc) denies the existence of these volunteers and insists that the insurgency in eastern Ukraine is the result of "invasions" by regular Russian army troops.

What the conspiracy theory now ?

Elmer Blooker

Gatling wrote: »

What the conspiracy theory now ?

What are you talking about? Where's the conspiracy theory?
Find me any article (in the mainstream media) that acknowledges the existence of these volunteers please.

robindch

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Find me any article (in the mainstream media) that acknowledges the existence of these volunteers please.

Here's one from TASS:

http://tass.ru/en/russia/816955

Or you could try this report from Vice - though I'm sure you're going to say it's controlled by the CIA or moon-lizards or something like that:

https://news.vice.com/video/selfie-soldiers-russia-checks-in-to-ukraine

Elmer Blooker

Here's a perfect example.
"Russian military involvement"
http://www.rferl.org/content/ukraine-russia-military-involvement-volunteer/27144747.html

controlled by the CIA or moon-lizards or something like that:

whats a moon lizard?

Gatling

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Here's a perfect example.
"Russian military involvement"
http://www.rferl.org/content/ukraine-russia-military-involvement-volunteer/27144747.html

whats a moon lizard?

This might help

Луна ящерицы

Elmer Blooker

robindch wrote: »

Or you could try this report from Vice

https://news.vice.com/video/selfie-soldiers-russia-checks-in-to-ukraine

I can't find any mention of "volunteers" in that?

robindch

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

robindch wrote:

Or you could try this report from Vice - though I'm sure you're going to say it's controlled by the CIA or moon-lizards or something like that:

https://news.vice.com/video/selfie-soldiers-russia-checks-in-to-ukraine

I can't find any mention of "volunteers" in that?

You'll actually have to watch the video.

Here it is again if you're having trouble locating it - you have to press the little white triangle in the middle of the picture - just above the reporter's 'Press'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zssIFN2mso

Elmer Blooker

robindch wrote: »

You'll actually have to watch the video.

Here it is again if you're having trouble locating it - you have to press the little white triangle in the middle of the picture - just above the reporter's 'Press'

Your tone is as conceited and superior as ever. I find it amusing at this stage.

That's Simon Ostrovsky isn't it? I wouldn't press the little white triangle in the middle of the picture if you paid me!

robindch

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I wouldn't press the little white triangle in the middle of the picture if you paid me!

Seems you won't ever get to hear about Putin's little green volunteers then, will you?

And as for paying you? Well, here you go:

robindch

Gatling wrote: »

Луна ящерицы

"Ящерицы c луны" would be a better translation - Elmer, what do you think?

Elmer Blooker

robindch wrote: »

Elmer, what do you think?

Juvenile. Am I meant to be impressed? I'm not.
At least you spared me the "I was manning the barricades" stuff

Putin

A pity that some posters don't seem to understand what the word 'appreciation' means. Or what an appreciation thread is all about.

Gatling

Putin wrote: »

A pity that some posters don't seem to understand what the word 'appreciation' means. Or what an appreciation thread is all about.

A putin bot will be along soon to post in support ,


Please leave a message after the tone